The long-awaited CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 has finally passed the U.S. House of Representatives, after being batted back and forth with the Senate for the past few months. The bill is the final step in a long line of efforts in the past few years to get actual legislation passed that would curb the growing amount of spam in America's in-boxes.

The bill, which President Bush has promised to sign into law by the end of the month, includes quite a few restrictions on spam. It criminalizes the use of false or misleading headers, requires the inclusion of a return address, and prohibits the transmission of spam after a user opts out or objects. The bill also requires the inclusion inside all messages of information identifying it as an advertisement or solicitation, the ability to decline to receive other messages, and the sender's physical address.

The bill also calls on the Federal Trade Commission to look into the details of starting a “DO-Not-E-mail registry,” including the upkeep costs of such a service. In addition, it reportedly overwrites anti-spam bills passed in different states, including California's “anti-spam bill with teeth.”

JOSHUA'S OPINION
Although this is a positive move by Congress, which has been sitting on this issue for way too long, I don't think that it will have any appreciable impact in the lives of everyday Americans. Just think of what it will take to enact this bill. Police forces on all levels–federal, state, and local–are already swamped with work, our prisons are overcrowded, and the bureaucracy is so bloated a whale would recognize it as a cousin.

Something that bugs me about this bill is the fact that it overrules the tougher law enacted in California in September. Just what kind of good does that do?? At the very least, the U.S. Congress should have taken a few cues from California and made this bill a little bit more useful. As it is, Congress has overridden the bill that actually had spammers trembling a little bit, and has run roughshod over states' rights.

What we really need is for one of us geeks to figure out a method of blocking spam for good. The person who patents that process will have Bill Gates asking him for pocket change.

USER COMMENTS 16 comment(s)

California(10:34am EST Tue Dec 09 2003)It would be interesting to hear from some Californians regarding the impact/non-impact of their bill since it was passed. – by The Patient

Just(10:55am EST Tue Dec 09 2003)Prosecute the owner of the SMTP server that the SPAM originated from then they would close SMTP pass through and falsifying who you are wont be worth a lot for the SPAMMers… this bill ain't gonna do schinola as it stands. – by HateSPAM!!!

Oh, you'd actually have to find some way of ensuring the offshore spammers actually conform to this idea, too.

What's really needed is for the W3C to come up with more robust and secure email standards. – by JRink

save the zombies!(2:18pm EST Tue Dec 09 2003)“(whoever) accesses a protected computer without authorization, and intentionally initiates the transmission of multiple commercial electronic mail messages from or through such computer…”

Looks like this would protect the owners of zombie computers and lead the hunt back around to the original person who turned them into zombies. If the government ever figures out how to catch hackers (the ones that don't leave their name in the db they hacked, that is) there'll actually be something to charge them with. – by spook

Simple solution(7:48pm EST Tue Dec 09 2003)Convicted spammers get death penalty. No problems with over crowding in prisons. Only requires an enforcing officer, preferrably the large-built aggressive type, and a reuseable bat. And to be environment friendly, cremate the left overs and donate the ashes to your local bontanical projects. Everybody wins, except for the spammers, but they don't count because they are not considered to be part of the human species. – by eViL

A simple AI could toss a bunch of the crap out just by the header, sender or content. No doubt better filters could be implemented. If something is really important, you had better have my phone number because e-mail for me is NOT for passing critical information.

The only way to stop these buggers is to force them to clean up their act.

temporary inconvenience fantasy

Everyone blocks everything by default and must train the e-mail to accept certain addresses.

Block it at the mail server. Have ISPs make them a deal pay and we will deliver your crap to a users junk e-mail box, but only if your in the registry of legit mass mailers. If your not on the list, sorry your crap is dumped. Revenue goes into this new equipment I just had to buy to filter this mess.

Incintive to target your recipients a bit better. Charge, hmm 1/8 of the price of a bulk US mail service.

But to make it more cost effective for the masses, the certificates should be provided by the ISP as part of their service.

– by Dead Meat

Right on(1:35pm EST Wed Dec 10 2003)I often read these blurbs for the news. On occasion there is a post that gives me better insight. Too rarely recently.

Thanks Dead Meat. That link helped me solidify my thoughts on this matter, and to keep geek.com in my favs for another month. – by aint sayin

Congress is a bunch of sell outs(3:41pm EST Tue Apr 20 2004)Not only have i begun receiving like 300% MORE SPAM since the passing of this bill… but over half of them use FAKE opt-out passages… and now theyve found ingenious ways to get around the “filters”. As far as the acts attempt to “wholesomize” SPAM, ive also begun recieving copious amounts of viagra SPAMs and other sexually related junk email! I think everyone should start sending all their junk mail straight to congress… who in congress started this bill anyway? – by p.o.ed